Charles Hollander QC’s EU/Competition Law CV

Recommended by the Legal 500 for EU law.

Charles has in recent years acted in a number of significant High Court trials involving EU and competition issues and freedom of establishment. Viking, which involves union ship boycotts in Finland, started life as a commercial court trial which Charles argued and, since the ECJ decision, is now the leading case on freedom of establishment. The "Open Skies" litigation, involving a BA pilots' strike, gave rise to similar issues. Attheraces involved the High Court finding that the British Horseracing Board was guilty of excessive pricing in breach of Article 82 in relation to data rights after a four week trial, a decision subsequently reversed by the Court of Appeal. In Adidas the Claimants argued that the application by the tennis Grand Slam Committee of the dress code to the three stripes logo was discriminatory and in breach of both Art 81 and 82. H3G is the first important authority on the application of pre-action disclosure to competition cases. In BAGS the issue in a seven week trial earlier in 2008 was whether exclusive licence agreements for picture rights from racecourses involved price fixing and were in breach of art 81.

  • Purple and Meteor Parking v Heathrow Airport Ltd (airport parking monopoly)
  • Jones v Ricoh UK (breach of NDA in photocopier market)
  • Derwent v Mercedes-Benz (termination of 17 Mercedes distributorships)
  • Sel-Imperial v British Standards Institute (breach of competition act in over-rigorous standards)
  • Viking Line v ITF and FSA (freedom of establishment (Gloster J and CA, case settled after ruling by ECJ prior to referral back to CA)
  • BA v BALPA (freedom of establishment-pilots' strike)
  • Attheraces v British Horseracing Board (Etherton J and CA-excess pricing under Article 82 in relation to pre-race data)
  • Bookmakers Afternoon Greyhound Services v Amrac (Morgan J- Turf TV, exclusive agreements and Art 81)
  • Hutchison3G v O2 (pre-action disclosure in Art 81 mobile phone claim)
  • Adidas-Salomon v Draper Morritt VC (tennis dress code as breach of Art 81 and 82)